At midnight or thereabouts, the President is expected to sign off on the law putting sequestration into effect. But I wonder why. I honestly do. I do because he doesn’t have to as far as I can tell. It is a law, and like other laws it is bound by the constitution, is it not?

Article I, section 7, final sentence of paragraph two states:

If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

But it begs a few questions. Questions which I do not have answers to.

If the President is expected to sign the Sequester into law, that means it is being presented to him then and there, does it not? Or is there some other timetable that don’t know about that makes that question a moot one?

If it is true that the law is being presented to him today, and the constitution is followed, and he does not sign it, does that not mean that he will have extra time to see if he can work out a deal with the house, where all spending bills must originate?

The President, if he really is serious that he does not want to see these cuts take effect should simply not sign the bill. Which doesn’t mean he won’t.

Now I am not a constitutional scholar, I simply make points that I think need to be made, and ask questions that I think need to be asked.